Wednesday, September 26, 2018
1. IRS Issues Reminder to U.S. MNEs Filing Form 8975 with no U.S. Schedule A (Form 8975)
When submitting Form 8975 and Schedules A (Form 8975), filers must attach at least two Schedules A (Form 8975) to the Form 8975. At least one Schedule A should be for the United States.
A U.S. MNE group with only fiscally transparent United States business entities would not provide a Schedule A for the United States, but would provide a Schedule A for “stateless” entities.
Filers who do not submit either a U.S. or stateless Schedule A (Form 8975) will receive a letter notifying them that an amended return must be filed to ensure their complete and accurate information is exchanged.
U.S. MNEs must submit a Schedule A (Form 8975) for each tax jurisdiction in which one or more constituent entities is tax resident. The tax jurisdiction field in Part I of Schedule A is a mandatory field, and U.S. MNEs are required to enter a two-letter code for the tax jurisdiction to which the Schedule A pertains. The country code for the United States is “US” and the country code for “stateless” is “X5.” All other country codes can be found at www.IRS.gov/CountryCodes.
Form 8975 and Schedule A information is exchanged using the OECD Country Code List that is based on the ISO 3166-1 Standard. Although the country codes found in the IRS link above contain the jurisdictions listed in the table below, those jurisdictions do not correspond to a valid OECD country code for purposes of exchanging the information. Therefore, do not enter any of these country codes on the tax jurisdiction line of Part I of Schedule A.
|Tax Jurisdiction||Country Code|
|Ashmore and Cartier Islands||AT|
|Coral Sea Islands||CR|
If the tax jurisdiction specified in the above list is associated with a larger sovereignty, use the country code for the larger sovereignty with which the tax jurisdiction is associated (e.g., Akrotiri and Dhekelia are considered a British Overseas Territory, so the country code for the United Kingdom would be used (“UK”)). Otherwise, use a separate Schedule A for “stateless” using the tax jurisdiction code “X5”. In either case, you should include in Part III of Schedule A the name of the specific constituent entity and the jurisdiction where the constituent entity is located.
If a U.S. MNE files Form 8975 and Schedule A (Form 8975) on paper, the MNE should mail a copy of only page 1 of Form 8975 to Ogden to notify the IRS that Form 8975 and Schedules A (Form 8975) have been filed with a paper return.
If a U.S. MNE files Form 8975 and Schedules A (Form 8975) electronically, the filer should not mail a copy of page 1 of Form 8975 to the Ogden mailbox.
See the Instructions for Form 8975 and Schedule A (Form 8975) for further guidance.
If a U.S. MNE files Form 8975 and Schedules A (Form 8975) that the MNE later determines should be amended, the MNE must file an amended Form 8975 and all Schedules A (Form 8975), including any that have not been amended, with its amended tax return. The U.S. MNE should use the amended return instructions for the return with which Form 8975 and Schedules A were originally filed and check the amended report checkbox at the top of Form 8975. Note that the amended return (with the amended Form 8975 and all Schedules A) must be filed using the same method (electronically or by paper) as the original submission. In other words, if the U.S. MNE is required to e-file an original return and need to file an amended or superseding return, the amended return must also be e-filed. Note that for the paper filer, it must also submit page 1 of Form 8975 to Ogden.
Friday, September 21, 2018
Thursday, September 13, 2018
Treasury and IRS Issue Proposed Regulations Providing Clarity Regarding Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income
The U.S. Department of the Treasury and IRS today issued their first set of guidance on global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI). The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act requires U.S. shareholders to include GILTI generated by controlled foreign corporations (CFCs) in their gross income. “These proposed regulations will implement key provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and mark an important step towards modernizing the U.S. tax system as we shift from a worldwide system toward a territorial system,” said Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin. “We are providing clarity to taxpayers and closing loopholes that previously allowed for inappropriate international tax planning and shifting profits overseas.” download the proposed GILTI Regs here Download GILTI Regs
Under the new law, a U.S. taxpayer owning at least 10 percent of the value or voting rights in one or more CFCs is required to include its global intangible low-taxed income as currently taxable income, regardless of whether any amount is distributed to shareholders. This includes U.S. individuals, domestic corporations, partnerships, trusts and estates. The guidance issued today offers clarity for U.S. shareholders on computing global intangible low-taxed income. These proposed regulations do not include foreign tax credit computational rules, which will be addressed in future regulatory packages.
Income that is not Subpart F income may still be characterized as Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (“GILTI”). GILTI is not limited to income derived from intangible property nor restricted to low-taxed income earned outside the United States. Instead, IRC Section 951A applies to a much broader earnings pool, imposing a distinct residual tax on a CFC’s income that does not otherwise qualify as Subpart F income, IRC Section 956 income, high-taxed income, dividends from related parties, or “effectively connected income” under IRC Section 864(c).
The term GILTI means, with respect to a U.S. shareholder, the excess of the shareholder’s net CFC tested income for the taxable year over the shareholder’s net deemed tangible return for the taxable year. GILTI is calculated on an aggregate basis annually for all controlled foreign corporations that are owned by the same U.S. shareholder. The pro rata share of GILTI is deemed to be included in a U.S. shareholder’s income. However, importantly for the energy industry, GILTI does not include foreign oil and gas income, as well as U.S. effectively connected income, Subpart F income, and certain related party payments.
“Net tested income” of a U.S. shareholder is the aggregate net income of each of its CFCs other than (i) income that is effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business, (ii) subpart F income, (iii) income that is subject to an effective foreign income tax rate greater than 90 percent of the maximum U.S. corporate income tax rate, (iv) dividends received from related persons and (v) certain foreign oil and gas income.20 A U.S. shareholder’s “net deemed tangible income return” is generally an amount equal to 10 percent of the tax basis of the “Qualified Business Asset Investment” (“QBAI”) of each relevant CFC minus the net amount of interest expense taken into account in determining the net tested income. QBAI is the quarterly average tax bases in depreciable tangible property used in the corporation’s trade or business. For purposes of the QBAI calculation, the taxpayer is required to use straight-line depreciation. Certain businesses, especially upstream and midstream oil and gas companies, will likely have significant basis of depreciable tangible property offsetting the impact of GILTI for income that falls into the pool.
For taxable years 2018 through 2025, a deduction is allowed equal to 50 percent of GILTI and from 2026, the deduction is reduced to 37.5 percent. Then a U.S. shareholder is allowed 80 percent of the foreign tax credits attributable to GILTI. In the context of the 21 percent corporate tax rate, GILTI imposes an effective tax rate of 10.5 percent before the 80 percent allowance for foreign tax credits. Until 2026, if a U.S. shareholder’s applicable foreign tax credit to its GILTI is 13.125 percent or higher, then the shareholder will not owe a residual tax because of GILTI. The GILTI regime in effect imposes a foreign minimum tax on 10.5 percent on U.S. shareholders’ CFC income to the extent the CFCs have GILTI. GILTI operates without regard to whether the income in question is from the exploitation of intangible assets. In general, because upstream companies have higher effective rates than 13 percent, GILTI will not impose additional tax.
Tuesday, September 11, 2018
OECD releases seven new transfer pricing country profiles and an update of a previously-released profile
The OECD has published new transfer pricing country profiles for Costa Rica, Greece, Republic of Korea, Panama, Seychelles, South Africa and Turkey. In addition, it has also updated the information contained in Singapore’s profile. The country profiles are now available for 52 countries.
The OECD has published new transfer pricing country profiles for Costa Rica, Greece, Republic of Korea, Panama, Seychelles, South Africa and Turkey. In addition, it has also updated the information contained in Singapore’s profile. The country profiles are now available for 52 countries.
The OECD continues to publish and update the transfer pricing country profiles for OECD and all interested members of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS to reflect the current state of each country legislation and practice regarding the application of the arm’s length principle and other key transfer pricing aspects. The transfer pricing country profiles include information on transfer pricing methods, the comparability analysis, intangible property, intra-group services, cost contribution agreements, transfer pricing documentation, administrative approaches to avoiding and resolving disputes, safe harbours and other implementation measures as well as to what extent the specific national rules follow the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines.
The information was provided by countries themselves in response to a questionnaire so as to achieve the highest degree of accuracy.
The transfer pricing country profiles reflect the revisions to the Transfer Pricing Guidelines resulting from the 2015 Reports on Actions 8-10 Aligning Transfer Pricing Outcomes with Value Creation and Action 13 Transfer Pricing Documentation and Country-by-Country Reporting of the OECD/G20 Project on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), in addition to changes incorporating the revised guidance on safe harbours approved in 2013 and consistency changes made to the rest of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines.
Monday, September 10, 2018
Countries have used recent tax reforms to lower taxes on businesses and individuals, with a view to boosting investment, consumption and labour market participation, continuing a trend that started a couple of years ago, according to a new report from the OECD.
This report describes the latest tax reforms across 35 OECD members, Argentina, Indonesia and South Africa. It identifies major tax policy trends and highlights that economic stimulus provided by fiscal policy, including to a large extent through tax policy, has become more significant.
This third edition covers the latest tax policy reforms in all OECD countries, as well as in Argentina, Indonesia and South Africa. Monitoring tax policy reforms and understanding the context in which they were undertaken is crucial to informing tax policy discussions and to supporting governments in the assessment and design of tax reforms.
Tuesday, September 4, 2018
|Location :||New York, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA|
|Application Deadline :||09-Oct-18 (Midnight New York, USA)|
|Time left :||39d 5h 51m|
|Additional Category :||Management|
|Type of Contract :||Individual Contract|
|Post Level :||International Consultant|
|Languages Required :
|Starting Date :
(date when the selected candidate is expected to start)
|Duration of Initial Contract :||Varies for each call-off assignment|
|Expected Duration of Assignment :||Varies for each call-off assignment|
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), with whom the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) runs a joint secretariat for the Tax Inspectors Without Borders (TIWB) project, works in more than 170 countries and territories, helping to achieve the eradication of poverty, and the reduction of inequalities and exclusion. It helps countries to implement projects, develop policies, leadership skills, share experiences, develop institutional capabilities and build resilience in order to sustain development results.
The OECD is a global economic forum working with 36 member countries and more than 100 emerging and developing economies to make better policies for better lives. Its mission is to promote policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world. The OECD provides a unique forum in which governments work together to share experiences on what drives economic, social and environmental change, seeking solutions to common problems.
Tax Inspectors Without Borders (TIWB) is a joint initiative of the OECD and UNDP designed to support developing countries to strengthen national tax administrations through building tax audit capacity and to share this knowledge with other countries. Under TIWB, tax audit experts work alongside local officials of developing country tax administrations on tax audit related issues. TIWB aims to strengthen tax administrations by transferring technical know-how and skills to developing countries’ tax auditors, and through the sharing of general audit practices and dissemination of knowledge products.
For further information on TIWB and the partnership between the OECD and UNDP, please visit the TIWB website.
Duties and Responsibilities
To support implementation of TIWB, an established Roster of Tax Audit Experts is being expanded.
UNDP is looking for energetic, enthusiastic and experienced tax (audit) experts to take on exceptional opportunities, as TIWB Tax Audit Experts in different parts of the world. The main responsibility will be to provide technical assistance to tax administrations of developing countries, on real time audits and on-the-job training programmes to build audit skills.
Experts will need to demonstrate extensive professional experience in all three areas listed below:
Experience in the following areas will be considered an additional advantage:
The assignments require close collaboration with the TIWB Secretariat, UNDP and the host administration in the developing country. This role will require travel and missions of varying durations composed of four to six missions (one to two weeks at a time) per year, depending on the programme. A typical TIWB Programme is on average 12 to 18 months long.
The duties and responsibilities detailed below are a representative, but not exhaustive, list of potential activities assignment. Specific Terms of Reference (ToR) will dictate the scope of work and the selection of experts from the vetted Roster for each of the assignments. Key areas of support and activities will include:
Capacity development and training for tax administrations:
Generation of knowledge and sharing of best practices:
The hired consultants will report to UNDP and seek approval/acceptance of outputs as specified in the contract.
Experts will need to demonstrate the following:
Required Skills and Experience
Scope of Price Proposal and Schedule of Payments:
Recommended Presentation of Offer:
Qualified candidates are requested to apply online via this website. The application should contain:
Incomplete applications will not be considered. Please make sure you have provided all requested materials. Please group all your documents into one (1) single PDF document as the system only allows uploading of one document maximum.
Qualified women are strongly encouraged to apply.
For individuals currently serving in a tax administration, authorisation from your tax administration may be required to apply for the Roster.
Due to the large number of applications we receive, we are able to inform only the successful candidates about the outcome or status of the selection process.
Criteria for Selection of the Best Offer:
Desk review of technical criteria as evident in the submitted application:
The maximum points that can be achieved in the desk review are 35 points.
Only those applicants obtaining a minimum of 25 points in the desk review will be considered for an interview. A total of 35 additional points (with same scoring breakdown as desk review) can then be obtained in the interview bringing the total points for the technical evaluation to a maximum of 70;
Only those candidates who obtain a total technical score of 49 points and above will be considered for the roster.
Several successful individuals will be selected and placed on the Tax Audit Expert Roster for a period of up to three years. It is to be noted that inclusion in the Roster does not guarantee a contract during the period of three years.
Rostered experts will be contacted when specific assignments arise and will be asked to indicate availability and interest against a specific Terms of Reference which outlines the outputs of the assignment.
Upon secondary selection, an Individual Contract (IC) or Reimbursable Loan Agreements (RLA) will then be awarded for these specific ToRs, including the time frame.
For Individuals who will be represented on behalf of an organization/company/institution, a RLA will be signed between UNDP and the organization/company/institution. RLA: A legal instrument between UNDP and an organization/company/institution, according to which, the latter makes available the services of an individual delivering time bound and quantifiable outputs that are directly linked to payments.
Payments will be made as specified in the actual contract upon confirmation of UNDP on delivering against the contract obligations in a satisfactory manner.
Annexes (click on the hyperlink to access the documents):
Annex 1 - UNDP P-11 Form for ICs
Annex 2 - IC Contract Template
Annex 3 - IC General Terms and Conditions
Annex 4 - RLA Template
Any request for clarification must be sent by email to email@example.com
The UNDP Central Procurement Unit will respond by email and will send written copies of the response, including an explanation of the query without identifying the source of inquiry, to all applicants.
Monday, September 3, 2018
The U.S. Department of the Treasury today issued a proposed rule on the federal income tax treatment of payments and property transfers under state and local tax credit programs. The proposed rule would prevent charitable contributions from being used to circumvent the new limitation on state and local tax deductions.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) limits the amount of state and local taxes (SALT) an individual can deduct to $10,000 a year. Several states have enacted or are considering enacting tax credit programs to circumvent the TCJA limit.
“Congress limited the deduction for state and local taxes that predominantly benefited high-income earners to help pay for major tax cuts for American families,” said Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin. “The proposed rule will uphold that limitation by preventing attempts to convert tax payments into charitable contributions. We appreciate the value of state tax credit programs, particularly school choice initiatives, and we believe the proposed rule will have no impact on federal tax benefits for donations to school choice programs for about 99 percent of taxpayers compared to prior law.”
The proposed rule is a straightforward application of a longstanding principle of tax law: When a taxpayer receives a valuable benefit in return for a donation to charity, the taxpayer can deduct only the net value of the donation as a charitable contribution. The rule applies that quid pro quo principle to state tax benefits provided to a donor in return for contributions.
For instance, if a state grants a 50 percent credit and the taxpayer contributes $1,000, the allowable charitable contribution deduction may not exceed $500. The proposed rule provides an exception for dollar-for-dollar state and local tax deductions and tax credits of no more than 15 percent of the payment amount or of the fair market value of the property transferred. These guidelines will apply to both new and existing tax credit programs.
Due to a major increase in the standard deduction, Treasury projects that 90 percent of taxpayers will not itemize under the new tax law. The proposed rule will not affect these taxpayers at all. Treasury estimates that approximately 5 percent of taxpayers will itemize and have state and local income tax deductions above the SALT cap. Those taxpayers will generally see no change in the level of federal tax benefits available to them before the TCJA, but will be unable to exploit the charitable deduction to avoid the SALT cap.
Treasury expects that only about 1 percent of taxpayers will see an effect on tax benefits for donations to school choice tax credit programs.
The Internal Revenue Service today announced that the Summer 2018 Statistics of Income Bulletin is now available on IRS.gov. The Statistics of Income (SOI) Division produces the online Bulletin quarterly, providing the most recent data available from various tax and information returns filed by U.S. taxpayers. This issue includes articles on the following topics:
- Controlled Foreign Corporations, Tax Year 2012: The number of foreign corporations controlled by U.S. multinational corporations increased in 2012 to 88,038. End-of-year assets ($18.6 trillion), total receipts ($6.9 trillion), and current earnings and profits (less deficit) before income taxes ($924 billion) all increased from Tax Year 2010. More than 79 percent of controlled foreign corporations (CFCs) were concentrated in the services; goods production; and distribution and transportation of goods sectors. CFCs were incorporated in 192 different countries of which over 40 percent were incorporated in Europe.
- Foreign Recipients of U.S. Income, Calendar Year 2015: U.S.-source income payments to foreign persons, as reported on Form 1042-S, Foreign Person's U.S.-Source Income Subject to Withholding, rose to $824.3 billion for Calendar Year 2015. This represents an increase of 13.2 percent from 2014. U.S.-source income payments subject to withholding tax rose by 24.2 percent from 2014, which fueled an increase in withholding taxes of 13.1 percent. Despite these increases, 85.7 percent of all U.S.-source income paid to foreign persons remained exempt from withholding tax. The residual U.S.-source income subject to tax was withheld at an average rate of 15.6 percent.
SOI Bulletin articles are available for download at IRS.gov/statistics.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
CEO and CFO of Utah Biodiesel Company and California Businessman Charged in $500 Million Fuel Tax Credit Scheme
A federal grand jury sitting in the District of Utah has returned an indictment, which was unsealed today, charging the CEO and CFO of Washakie Renewable Energy (WRE), a Utah-based biodiesel company, and a California businessman with laundering proceeds of a mail fraud scheme, which obtained over $511 million in renewable fuel tax credits from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, U.S. Attorney John W. Huber for the District of Utah, Don Fort, Chief of IRS Criminal Investigation and Jessica Taylor, Director of Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division.
According to the indictment, Jacob Kingston was Chief Executive Officer and Isaiah Kingston was Chief Financial Officer of WRE and each held a 50% ownership interest in the company. WRE has described itself as the “largest producer of biodiesel and chemicals in the intermountain west.”
Jacob Kingston, Isaiah Kingston, and Lev Aslan Dermen (aka Levon Termendzhyan), owner of California-based fuel company NOIL Energy Group, allegedly schemed to file false claims for renewable fuel tax credits, which caused the IRS to issue over $511 million to WRE. Jacob Kingston is separately charged with filing nine false claims for refund on behalf of WRE in 2013.
The IRS administered tax credits designed to increase the amount of renewable fuel used and produced in the United States. These tax credits were paid by the IRS regardless of whether the taxpayer owed other taxes.
From 2010 through 2016, as part of their fraud to obtain the fuel tax credits, the defendants allegedly created false production records and other paperwork routinely created in qualifying renewable fuel transactions along with other false documents. To make it falsely appear that qualifying fuel transactions were occurring, the defendants rotated products through places in the United States and through at least one foreign country. The defendants also allegedly used “burner phones” and other covert means to communicate during the scheme.
The indictment further charges that the defendants laundered part of the scheme proceeds through a series of financial transactions related to the purchase of a $3 million personal residence for Jacob Kingston. Jacob and Isaiah Kingston are separately alleged to have laundered approximately $1.72 million in scheme proceeds to purchase a 2010 Bugatti Veyron. Jacob Kingston and Lev Aslan Dermen are separately charged with money laundering related to an $11.2 million loan funded by scheme proceeds.
If convicted, the defendants each face a maximum of 10 years in prison for each money laundering count and Jacob Kingston faces a maximum of 3 years in prison for each false tax return count. They also face a period of supervised release, monetary penalties, and restitution.
Monday, August 27, 2018
Entertainment Industry Business Manager Convicted of Defrauding Celebrity Clients, Bankruptcy Fraud and Tax Charges
A federal jury in Columbus, Ohio has convicted Kevin R. Foster, 42, of Montclair, NJ, of 16 charges related to a fraud scheme. He was found guilty of wire fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, tax evasion and filing a false tax return, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, U.S. Attorney Benjamin C. Glassman for the Southern District of Ohio, Special Agent in Charge Ryan L. Korner for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Criminal Investigation; and Special Agent in Charge Angela L. Byers for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Cincinnati Division.
This case stems from the prior prosecution of Thomas E. Jackson and Preston J. Harrison, who, according to court documents, collected approximately $9 million from investors under false pretenses to start and market the sports beverage OXYwater through their company, Imperial Integrative Health Research and Development (Imperial). The two were convicted by a federal jury in March 2015 of multiple wire fraud, money laundering and tax fraud charges.
According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Foster, as the principal of his management/accounting firm, Foster & Firm, Inc., and as business manager for Shaffer Smith, a/k/a Ne-Yo, induced Smith to invest $2 million into OXYwater under false representations. Unbeknownst to Smith, Foster invested an additional $1.5 million of Smith’s money into the product without his consent and fraudulently took out $1.4 million in lines of credit under Smith’s name by forging his signature.
Foster also defrauded a second celebrity client, Brian McKnight, as a way to secure money to help keep Imperial solvent.
Foster also stole millions of dollars from Smith and McKnight’s bank accounts in order to fund the operations of OXYwater as well as his own lavish lifestyle, including multiple luxury vehicles, a personal driver, designer watches, and season tickets to the New York Giants and New York Knicks.
Smith and McKnight agreed to invest in the company, not knowing that Foster was receiving a substantial commission based on their investments, that he served as an officer/controller of Imperial and that he controlled an Imperial bank account.
In addition, Foster failed to report on his 2012 and 2013 tax returns the millions of dollars that he stole from Smith and McKnight. He also claimed millions of dollars in bogus deductions in order to further reduce his tax liability.
Foster was charged in an original, seven-count indictment in July 2016. A superseding indictment containing 10 counts was returned in November 2017. The final, second superseding indictment added six more charges in May 2018.
Friday, August 17, 2018
The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an opinion yesterday reversing a Tax Court decision that had rejected the Commissioner’s valuation method in a closely watched transfer-pricing case: Download Medtronic_opinion
The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an opinion August 16, 2018, reversing the Tax Court decision. The Tax Court determined that the Pacesetter agreement was an appropriate CUT because it involved similar intangible property and had similar circumstances regarding licensing. The Eighth Circuit held that the Tax Court had adopted the transfer pricing method of the taxpayer without first engaging in the analysis required under Treasury’s transfer-pricing regulations. The Eighth Circuit remanded the case back because the tax court’s factual findings were insufficient to conduct an evaluation of the determination.
The Eighth Circuit provided three primary areas of analysis to be conducted. First, the tax court must address in sufficient detail whether the circumstances of the settlement between Pacesetter and Medtronic U.S. were comparable to the licensing agreement between Medtronic and Medtronic Puerto Rico. Second, the tax court must analyze the degree of comparability of the Pacesetter agreement’s contractual terms and those of the Medtronic Puerto Rico licensing agreement. Finally, the tax court must then decide the amount of risk and product liability expense that should be allocated between Medtronic U.S. and Medtronic Puerto Rico. The Eighth Circuit stated that determining the degree of comparability between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions requires a comparison of the significant contractual terms that could affect the results of the two transactions. Because the Tax Court failed to make the necessary factual findings, the Eighth Circuit was unable to determine whether the court “applied the best transfer pricing method for calculating an arm’s length result or whether it made proper adjustments under its chosen method.” Accordingly, it vacated the Tax Court’s order and remanded the case for further consideration by the Tax Court.
For further analysis, see the leading treatise of William Byrnes & Robert Cole (deceased), Practical Guide to U.S. Transfer Pricing. Available on Lexis.
 Medtronic, Inc. & Consolidated Subsidiaries v. Commissioner, No. 17-1866.
Thursday, August 9, 2018
Wednesday, August 8, 2018
The Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service today issued proposed regulations on the new 100-percent depreciation deduction that allows businesses to write off most depreciable business assets in the year they are placed in service.
The proposed regulations, available today in the Federal Register, implement several provisions included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA),
The 100-percent depreciation deduction generally applies to depreciable business assets with a recovery period of 20 years or less and certain other property. Machinery, equipment, computers, appliances and furniture generally qualify.
The deduction is retroactive, applying to qualifying property acquired and placed in service after Sept. 27, 2017. The proposed regulations provide guidance on what property qualifies for the deduction and rules for qualified film, television, live theatrical productions and certain plants.
For details on claiming the deduction or electing out of claiming it, see the proposed regulations or the instructions to Form 4562, Depreciation and Amortization (Including Information on Listed Property).
Taxpayers who elect out of the 100-percent depreciation deduction must do so on a timely-filed return. Those who have already filed their 2017 return and either did not claim the mandatory deduction on qualifying property, or did not elect out but still wish to do so, will need to file an amended return.
Treasury and IRS welcome public comment, and the proposed regulations provide details on how to submit comments.
Tuesday, August 7, 2018
The Internal Revenue Service issued guidance today on new tax law changes that allow small business taxpayers with average annual gross earnings of $25 million or less in the prior three-year period to use the cash method of accounting.
The Revenue Procedure outlines the process that eligible small business taxpayers may obtain automatic consent to change accounting methods that are now permitted under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA.
The TCJA, enacted in December 2017, expands the number of small business taxpayers eligible to use the cash method of accounting and exempts these small businesses from certain accounting rules for inventories, cost capitalization and long-term contracts. As a result, more small business taxpayers will be allowed to change to cash method accounting starting after Dec. 31, 2017.
The Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service welcome public comments on future guidance. For details on submitting comments, see the Revenue Procedure.
Wednesday, August 1, 2018
IRS and Treasury issue proposed regulations implementing repatriation tax of 15.5% on cash and 8% on assets on deferred offshore earnings under new IRC Section 965
The Internal Revenue Service and the Department of the Treasury today issued proposed regulations on section 965 of the Internal Revenue Code. The proposed regulations affect United States shareholders, as defined under section 951(b) of the Code, with direct or indirect ownership in certain specified foreign corporations, as defined under section 965(e) of the Code. Download Prop reg 965 repatriation tax
Section 965, enacted in December 2017, levies a transition tax on post-1986 untaxed foreign earnings of specified foreign corporations owned by United States shareholders by deeming those earnings to be repatriated. For domestic corporations, foreign earnings held in the form of cash and cash equivalents are generally intended to be taxed at a 15.5 percent rate for 2017 calendar years, and the remaining earnings are intended to be taxed at an 8 percent rate for 2017 calendar years.
The lower effective tax rates applicable to section 965 income inclusions are achieved by way of a participation deduction set out in section 965(c) of the Code. A reduced foreign tax credit also applies with respect to the inclusion under section 965(g) of the Code.
Taxpayers may generally elect to pay the transition tax in installments over an eight-year period under section 965(h) of the Code. The proposed regulations contain detailed information on the calculation and reporting of a United States shareholder’s section 965(a) inclusion amount, as well as information for making the elections available to taxpayers under section 965.
New content is available on the CbC Reporting pages:
- The Jurisdiction Status Table contains recently signed Competent Authority Arrangements for the exchange of CbC Reports.
- The Country-by-Country Reporting Guidance webpage contains new guidance and resources.
Wednesday, July 25, 2018
Global Forum publishes tax transparency compliance ratings for seven jurisdictions and welcomes three new members
The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes (the Global Forum), published today seven peer review reports assessing compliance with the international standard on tax transparency and exchange of information on request (EOIR).
These reports assess jurisdictions against the updated standard which incorporates beneficial ownership information of all legal entities and arrangements, in line with the definition used by the Financial Action Task Force Recommendations.
Two jurisdictions – Guernsey and San Marino – received an overall rating of “Compliant.” Four others – Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines and the United States were rated “Largely Compliant.” Kazakhstan was rated “Partially Compliant.” The jurisdictions have demonstrated their progress on many deficiencies identified in the first round of reviews. Main challenges in this second round are associated with ensuring the availability of beneficial ownership information, an element of the standard that was strengthened in 2016.
The Global Forum is the leading multilateral body mandated to ensure that jurisdictions around the world adhere to and effectively implement the international tax transparency standards both the standard of exchange of information on request and the standard of automatic exchange of information. This objective is achieved through a robust monitoring and peer review process. The Global Forum also runs an extensive technical assistance programme to provide support to its members in implementing the standards and helping tax authorities to make the best use of cross-border information sharing channels.
The Global Forum also welcomed three new countries into its membership – Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cabo Verde and Swaziland. This takes its membership to 153 members who have come together to cooperate in the international fight against cross border tax evasion.
For additional information on the Global Forum, its peer review process, and to read all reports to date, go to: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/global-forum-on-transparency-and-exchange-of-information-for-tax-purposes-peer-reviews_2219469x.
Tuesday, July 24, 2018
Treasury Department and IRS Announce Significant Reform to Protect Personal Donor Information to Certain Tax-Exempt Organizations
Policy Relieves Burdens on Taxpayers While Preserving Transparency
The Treasury Department and IRS announced that the IRS will no longer require certain tax-exempt organizations to file personally-identifiable information about their donors as part of their annual return. The revenue procedure released today does not affect the statutory reporting requirements that apply to tax-exempt groups organized under section 501(c)(3) or section 527, but it relieves other tax-exempt organizations of an unnecessary reporting requirement that was previously added by the IRS.
Nearly fifty years ago, Congress directed the IRS to collect donor information from charities that accept tax-deductible contributions. That statutory requirement applies to the majority of tax-exempt organizations, known as section 501(c)(3) organizations, receiving contributions that can be claimed by donors as charitable deductions. This policy provided the IRS information that could be used to confirm contributions to those organizations.
By regulation, however, the IRS extended the donor reporting requirement to all other tax-exempt organizations—labor unions and volunteer fire departments, issue-advocacy groups and local chambers of commerce, veterans groups and community service clubs. These groups do not generally receive tax deductible contributions, yet they have been required to list the names and addresses of their donors on Schedule B of their annual returns (Form 990).
“Americans shouldn’t be required to send the IRS information that it doesn’t need to effectively enforce our tax laws, and the IRS simply does not need tax returns with donor names and addresses to do its job in this area,” said U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin. “It is important to emphasize that this change will in no way limit transparency. The same information about tax-exempt organizations that was previously available to the public will continue to be available, while private taxpayer information will be better protected. The IRS’s new policy for certain tax-exempt organizations will make our tax system simpler and less susceptible to abuse.”
Summary of New IRS Policy
- Tax-exempt organizations described by section 501(c), other than section 501(c)(3) organizations, are no longer required to report the names and addresses of their contributors on the Schedule B of their Forms 990 or 990-EZ.
- These organizations must continue to collect and keep this information in their records and make it available to the IRS upon request, when needed for tax administration.
- Form 990 and Schedule B information that was previously open to public inspection will continue to be reported and open to public inspection.
- The Internal Revenue Code expressly governs the tax-return reporting of donor information by charities that primarily receive tax-deductible contributions (under section 501(c)(3)) and political organizations (under section 527). The IRS action today does not affect those organizations.
After careful review, Treasury and the IRS have decided to relieve these tax-exempt organizations (other than organizations described in section 501(c)(3) or section 527) of a requirement that Congress never imposed for several reasons:
- First, the IRS makes no systematic use of Schedule B with respect to these organizations in administering the tax code. Donor information for many of these organizations was once relevant to the federal gift tax, but Congress eliminated that need in 2015 by making gifts to many of these tax-exempt organizations tax-free. The IRS has no tax administration need for continuing the routine collection of donor names and addresses as part of an exempt organization’s annual tax return. If the information is needed for purposes of an examination, the IRS will be able ask the organization for it directly.
- Second, the new policy will better protect taxpayers by reducing the risk of inadvertent disclosure or misuse of confidential information—an especially important safeguard for organizations engaged in free speech and free association protected by the First Amendment. Unfortunately, the IRS has accidentally released confidential Schedule B information in the past. In addition, conservative tax-exempt groups were disproportionately impacted by improper screening in the previous Administration, including what the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration concluded were inappropriate inquiries related to donors. Ending the unnecessary collection of sensitive donor information will reinforce the reforms already implemented by the IRS in the wake of the political targeting scandal and enhance public trust in the agency.
- Third, the new policy will save both private and government resources. On the taxpayer side, the previous policy added needless paperwork. On the government side, the IRS has been forced to devote scarce resources to redacting donor names and addresses (as required by federal law) before making Schedule B filings public. Now, the IRS will no longer require personally-identifiable donor information that the IRS does not regularly need and the public does not see. The public information will continue to be available, just as before.
The IRS’s new policy will relieve thousands of organizations of an unnecessary regulatory burden, while better protecting sensitive taxpayer information and ensuring appropriate transparency.
Monday, July 23, 2018
|Tax Facts Team|
|William H. Byrnes, J.D., LL.M
Tax Facts Author
|Richard Cline, J.D.
Senior Director, Practical Insights
|Robert Bloink, J.D., LL.M.
Tax Facts Author
|Jason Gilbert, J.D.
|Alexis Long, J.D.
|Connie L. Jump
Senior Manager, Editorial Operations
Senior Editorial Assistant